A comparative study of ECEC practitioners’ perceptions of children’s well-being and their roles in South Korea and Norway

ABSTRACT

This comparative study investigated how early childhood education and care practitioners in South Korea and Norway perceive the concept of children’s well-being and their own roles in supporting and facilitating children’s well-being. Data were collected through online questionnaires from 198 practitioners and analysed utilising chi-square analyses. The results showed that South Korean practitioners perceived the cognitive and economic domains as more important than Norwegian practitioners. Meanwhile, the practitioners from Norway perceived the social domain as more important than South Korean practitioners. Norwegian practitioners perceived physical needs, need for affection, and enjoyment as more important than Korean practitioners. Norwegian practitioners also monitored every child’s well-being and more actively encouraged positive interactions and child-initiated activities. Meanwhile, Korean practitioners perceived the need for safety as important and believed that environments were not safe enough for children’s health and well-being. These findings suggest that the educational approaches and sociocultural contexts of the two countries influence children’s well-being.

KEYWORDS:

• Children’s well-being
• ECEC
• practitioner’s perception
• practitioner’s role
• comparative study
• South Korea
• Norway

Introduction

The concept and importance of children’s well-being

Research on well-being has increased in recent decades (Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2007; Ben-Arieh 2008; Mashford-Scott, Church, and Tayler 2012; Koch 2018; Lewis 2019), and there are now many perspectives on how well-being can be defined, measured, and supported. Amerijckx and Humblet (2013) argued against a unidimensional, single-level, unipolar approach to child well-being and for further development of its positive, hedonic, subjective, spiritual, and collective dimensions. Emotional aspects are particularly important for understanding of children’s well-being (Laevers 2000; Statham and Chase 2010; Waters 2014). However, the literature covers broad aspects of children’s well-being, including the five domains of physical, psychological, cognitive, social, and economic well-being (Pollard and Lee 2003; Lewis 2019). Lewis (2019) highlighted the value of multidisciplinary perspectives on well-being emerging from psychology, economics, and sociology for understanding the complex nature of well-being, in particular in the context of early childhood education.

Interest in well-being has grown out of the increasing number of international studies on the many positive consequences of well-being, such as effective learning, better development, productivity, good health, and a longer life expectancy (Laevers 2005; Huppert and So 2013). Children around the world are spending more time in institutions outside the home. Therefore, experts need to understand what aspects of institutional quality mean for young children. One of these might be children’s feeling of being well, having a sense of happiness and satisfaction, and feeling well in relation to others (Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2009; Mashford-Scott, Church, and Tayler 2012; Koch 2018). Ferre Laevers and his research team (Laevers 2005) referred to signs of children’s well-being as enjoyment, relaxation and inner peace, vitality, openness, self-confidence, and being in touch with oneself. Children with a high level of well-being have an open and receptive attitude toward their environment, are spontaneous, and can fully be themselves. According to Laevers (2005), well-being is linked to self-confidence, a good degree of self-esteem, and resilience. Well-being is about quality of life.

Children’s well-being also depends on the environment, including sufficient space, opportunities for play, and the provision of a variety of toys and materials (Sheridan and Schuster 2001; Bjørgen 2015; Bjørgen and Svendsen 2015; Sandseter and Seland 2016; Sando 2019a, 2019b); agency, security/safety, and autonomy in play (Laevers 2005; Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2009); as well as positive interactions and relationships with peers and adults (Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2007, 2009; Bjørgen 2015; Sandseter and Seland 2017). Children are well when they have the psychological, social, and physical resources they need to meet particular psychological, social, and physical challenges (Dodge et al. 2012, 230). When individuals have more challenges than resources, the seesaw dips, along with their well-being, and vice versa. Well-being refers to an optimal relation between the child and his or her environment.

Practitioners’ roles in supporting children’s well-being in ECEC institutions

There is growing interest in and need for research on the quality of children’s everyday lives in early childhood education and care (ECEC) institutions. For instance, what promotes or impedes children’s well-being? Cross-cultural studies of the quality of ECEC highlight the fact that a stimulating and playful physical environment, a high staff-to-child ratio, and sufficient space to organise children into smaller groups create better learning conditions, well-being, and opportunities for play (Sheridan and Schuster 2001; De Schipper, Riksen-Walraven, and Geurts 2006; Sheridan et al. 2009). There is a consensus, supported by research (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] 2006), that well-educated and -trained professionals in ECEC are key to providing high-quality education and care and favourable cognitive and social outcomes for children. Children’s well-being seems to be influenced by the quality of practitioners’ roles as organisers of the environment, emotional supporters, and supporters of play in the education and care of children.

In terms of organisation of the environment, how practitioners arrange the physical environment and what toys/materials and equipment they provide in ECEC institutions are important to children’s well-being. According to researchers (Bjørgen and Svendsen 2015; Herrington and Brussoni 2015; Sando 2019b), the ways in which practitioners facilitate and use indoor and outdoor physical environments and nature for activities affect children’s well-being. In one study, Sando (2019b) found that children’s well-being was positively associated with the use of rooms for physical activity, which was perceived by children as play, and negatively associated with the use of high tables and chairs, which was perceived by children as work. In Fattore, Mason, and Watson’s (2009) study, children explained how the physical features of their natural or manmade environments provided a sense of well-being, in particular being well when the environment allowed them to be autonomous and free to engage actively in their community.

Playing in nature in particular is positively associated with children’s well-being (Bjørgen 2015; Herrington and Brussoni 2015; Sando 2019a). Nature can generate interest and involvement in surprising events, challenges, variety, and social relationships that contribute to well-being for both practitioners and kindergartners (Bjørgen and Svendsen 2015). However, there are safety issues when children play in nature. It can be difficult to balance challenging activities that thrill children, expand their boundaries, and develop confidence (Sandseter 2014; Bjørgen 2015) with the need for safety (Kwon and Oh 2019). Thus, practitioners’ strategies for supporting, guarding, and facilitating play in ECEC institutions are highly important (Sando 2019a).

Children’s well-being is strongly related to their agency, initiative, and autonomy in play. Accordingly, it is facilitated when children have opportunities to exert influence, agency (control over everyday life), and control over situations (security/safety), which provides feelings of mastery, a positive sense of self, and involvement (Laevers 2005; Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2009). Research on 4- to 6-year-olds’ perceptions of their well-being (Sandseter and Seland 2016) showed that in addition to the physical environment and the toys/equipment, opportunities to influence where to move, what to do, and with whom were important for children’s well-being. Therefore, practitioners’ attitude to encourage children to exert initiative and autonomy in their play is important to children’s well-being.

Children’s well-being is also strongly related to social and emotional factors, such as secure relationships and positive interactions with ECEC staff, friends, and families (Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2009; Bratterud, Sandseter, and Seland 2012; Mashford-Scott, Church, and Tayler 2012; Bjørgen 2015; Sandseter and Seland 2017). Opportunities for sharing and engaging in enjoyable play and activities with significant others such as practitioners and peers contribute to children’s well-being (Fattore, Mason, and Watson 2009; Bjørgen 2015). Children experience high levels of well-being when practitioners scaffold them in challenging activities while enjoying the activities and sharing the feeling of being challenged together with children (Bjørgen 2015). Thus, positive interactions and secure relationships among children and between children and practitioners are important to children’s well-being.

In summary, children’s well-being is enhanced when autonomy is encouraged in play with minimal adult intervention and children are given the opportunity to decide on their play. Relevant to children’s well-being are the practitioner’s role in organising a stimulating but safe environment, providing a variety of toys and materials, and encouraging positive interactions among children and between practitioners and children. In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by ECEC institutions or other organisations, the primary consideration should be the best interests of the child (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989). Therefore, practitioners have a great responsibility to secure children’s well-being and health. The way in which practitioners meet the social, emotional, and physical needs of children in ECEC institutions and their own willingness to engage in play and positive relations with them are thus of high importance.

Children’s well-being in different social and cultural contexts

Differences between countries in terms of welfare systems and cultural context impact ECEC, specifically, practitioners’ perceptions and opportunities to facilitate children’s well-being. In South Korea, children’s well-being and happiness have not been appreciated fully until recently. Because South Korea underwent industrialisation later than most European countries, its people focus more strongly on economic development and children’s education for future success. Tudor (2012), an English writer and journalist, pointed out that South Koreans have made tremendous progress in economic development and democracy but are not truly enjoying their lives because this development was based on the sacrifice of personal well-being and family happiness. However, improved economic development and social and political stability have altered people’s attitude toward life, and today people focus more on their present and less on their future. Interest in well-being and happiness has gradually increased in South Korea.

Norway is ranked near the top of OECD countries in terms of indicators of well-being and health, and life satisfaction in this country has remained relatively stable over the past decade compared to other OECD countries (www.oecdregionalwellbeing.org). In Norway, public ECEC institutions (e.g. kindergartens) play an important role in well-being, both by guaranteeing the protection of people’s fundamental rights and by ensuring the provision of goods and services necessary for people to thrive and prosper (OECD 2006, 2011). Recently, because of longer institutionalised childhoods in Norway, young children’s lives in ECEC institutions are given more attention. Norwegian ECEC institutions represent an important learning environment, and the focus on children’s well-being in these institutions is important for children’s short- and long-term learning and development.

In summary, well-being and life satisfaction in Norway are highly ranked among OECD countries, and interest in well-being has stabilised, whereas in South Korea tremendous economic development has been achieved and the issue of well-being is rapidly evolving and only now being appreciated. Therefore, it is interesting to investigate differences between South Korean and Norwegian ECEC practitioners’ perceptions of children’s well-being, and educational and child care practises. These results will have significant implications for countries in similar contexts.

ECEC in South Korea and Norway

Two types of institutions accommodate young children in South Korea: kindergartens and child care centres. Kindergartens, which are regulated and supported by the Ministry of Education (MOE), accommodate 3- to 6-year-olds; child care centres, which are regulated and supported by the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW), accommodate children from birth to 6 years of age. A common national curriculum, the Nuri Curriculum (MEST and MOHW 2013), has been provided for 3- to 6-year-olds enrolled in both kindergartens and child care centres since 2013. The Revised Nuri Curriculum (MOE and MOHW 2019a) was launched in 2020, focusing more on a child-centred, play-oriented approach. Meanwhile, child care centres serving children younger than 3 follow the Standard Child Care Curriculum (MOHW 2015). Both types of institutions are referred to as ‘ECEC institutions’ in this research.

The Revised Nuri Curriculum does not describe well-being specifically but suggests embracing children’s well-being in curriculum planning comprehensively. Although the term ‘well-being’ is not used, we can assume that the Revised Nuri Curriculum considers children’s happiness and well-being important through its use of phrases such as ‘respect for people (including oneself) and nature,’ ‘consider others in order to live together in a healthy and happy way as members of the community,’ and ‘enjoy physical activities to ensure a strong body and healthy mind.’ The Revised Nuri Curriculum particularly emphasises the holistic development and happiness of children as one characteristic of an ideal human being (MOE and MOHW 2019a, 26).

In Norway, ECEC institutions include public and private kindergartens. Mixed-age groups are typical in Norwegian kindergartens; there are often separate groups for 1- to 3-year-olds and 3- to 6-year-olds and sometimes groups for 1- to 6-year-olds. All Norwegian kindergartens are bound by the provisions of the Kindergarten Act (Government of Norway 2005) and a general curriculum, the Framework Plan for the Content and Tasks of Kindergartens (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training 2017). In the curriculum, well-being is a core value that helps ensure that all kindergartners can enjoy a good childhood. The curriculum states that Norwegian kindergartens shall contribute to children’s well-being, happiness, and feeling of self-worth. In Norway, kindergartens take a holistic approach to children’s development, and the basis of educational work and practice is a combination of play-oriented education and care along with children’s right to participate (Bae 2009). Practitioners work to create an environment that not only provides children with care but also values children’s own acts of caring.

Significance of the study

Well-being is a multidimensional concept and a socially and culturally constructed phenomenon (Pollard and Lee 2003; Mashford-Scott, Church, and Tayler 2012; Lewis 2019). There is little research-based knowledge on practitioners’ perceptions of well-being in ECEC institutions across different countries. This comparative study examines ECEC practitioners’ perceptions of children’s well-being and their roles in supporting and facilitating children’s well-being in South Korea and Norway. ECEC practitioners’ perceptions and knowledge affect the quality of services and outcomes primarily through the knowledge, skills, and competencies that are transmitted and encouraged by practitioners. More knowledge of ECEC practitioners’ perceptions of children’s well-being can result in better quality in ECEC institutions.

The follow research questions guided data collection and analysis:

• How do ECEC practitioners perceive the concept of children’s well-being in South Korea and Norway? Are there differences across countries?

• How do ECEC practitioners perform their roles to support children’s well-being in South Korea and Norway? Are there differences across countries?

Methods

Samples

The two research samples examined in this study were practitioners in charge of 3- to 6-year-olds from South Korea and Norway. For the South Korean sample, we contacted 30 directors of kindergarten and child care centres in Chungnam (middle province of South Korea) to explain the study. Then we received lists of practitioners working with 3- to 6-year-olds from the directors and provided a link to a questionnaire to the practitioners who agreed to participate.

For the Norwegian sample, we contacted the directors of 20 kindergartens in the middle of Norway by telephone, informed them about the project, and invited them to participate. We sent a link to the questionnaire to the directors of the kindergartens, who distributed it to participating practitioners who worked with children 3–6 years old in their kindergartens. Ultimately 98 practitioners in South Korea and 94 practitioners in Norway responded to the online questionnaire. Characteristics of the samples from Norway and South Korea are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Background information on the practitioners (N = 192).

Variable	Category	Korea	Norway
Type of institution	Municipal/public	48 (49.0)	53 (56.4)
	Private	50 (51.0)	41 (43.6)
Years of experience (teaching children)	Less than 1 year	17 (17.3)	23 (24.5)
	1–5 years	32 (32.7)	34 (36.2)
	5–10 years	25 (25.5)	17 (18.1)
	More than 10 years	24 (24.5)	20 (21.2)
Educational background	College (2∼3 years)	46 (47.0)	60 (63.8)
	University (4 years in Korea, 3 years in Norway)	34(34.7)	15 (16.0)
	Graduate school (6 years in Korea, 5 years in Norway)	18 (18.3)	19 (20.2)
Age of children in charge	3–4 years	33 (33.7)	26 (27.8)
	4–5 years	23 (23.5)	20 (21.2)
	5–6 years	29 (29.6)	10 (10.6)
	Mixed ages	13 (13.2)	38 (40.4)
Total		98 (100)	94 (100)

Both samples were fairly equally divided between private and public institutions. Participating practitioners in both countries were fully educated and qualified to care for and educate young children. Norwegian participants worked mostly with children of mixed ages (40.4%), with children fairly evenly divided between 3- and 4-year-olds and 4- and 5-year-olds and a low percentage with 5- to 6-year-olds. The high percentage of practitioners working with mixed-age groups is a normal distribution in the Norwegian institutions. Meanwhile, in South Korea, most participants were fairly distributed among groups of children, except for the low percentage in mixed-age groups (13.2%). In South Korea, ECEC institutions mostly operate on a large scale, which results in practitioners working with a single age group rather than mixed-age groups.

Procedure

Development of the questionnaire

Three researchers from South Korea and a researcher from Norway developed the questionnaire collaboratively. First, all research and literature related to well-being and children’s well-being was reviewed. From among the top 20 countries for child life satisfaction (UNICEF-Office of Research Card 2013), we collected six curriculum frameworks for which English versions were available that contained guidelines, frameworks, or standards for children’s well-being and/or education. These countries were Norway, Finland, Sweden, Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia. Then the four of us independently reviewed all documents and extracted content related to well-being and education.

Second, we categorised all of the content and extracted the two top categories through discussion: practitioners’ perceptions of the concept of children’s well-being and their own roles in supporting and facilitating children’s well-being. Discussions among the South Korean researchers were conducted face to face, and the results were e-mailed to the Norwegian researcher to discuss online. Practitioners’ perceptions of the concept of children’s well-being were evaluated according to the five domains of well-being (physical, psychological, cognitive, social, and economic) in Pollard and Lee (2003). The basic needs for fulfilling children’s well-being and the descriptors of children’s well-being were after Laevers (2005). Practitioners’ roles in supporting well-being in their institutions were extracted from the curriculum frameworks of the six countries. Then the questionnaire was revised and reorganised following our discussions. This process was repeated more than 10 times until we reached a consensus. The cultural and social contexts of both countries in regard to well-being were reflected during this process. Third, the questionnaire was pilot-tested by 5–10 practitioners in each country and amended following their feedback. Fourth, the final questionnaire was translated into Norwegian, aboriginal languages of Norway, and Korean.

The questionnaire covered practitioners’ background information (four questions), their perceptions of children’s well-being (17 questions), and their perceptions of their roles in supporting well-being in their institutions (14 questions). All questions, except for those on background information, used a 4-point Likert-type scale.

Online questionnaire

We used Google Forms to obtain responses from practitioners. Google Forms is a rapid, convenient, and free means of collecting data mostly regardless of geographic location. The data were collected from January 6 to May 31, 2019.

Analyses

Descriptive data and data on differences in practitioners’ perceptions of the concept of children’s well-being and their roles in supporting and facilitating children’s well-being in their institutions in each country were analysed through chi-square analysis using SPSS version 22.

Ethics

Ethical considerations of confidentiality and informed consent were taken into account. Information and personal data were anonymous, and the data will be deleted on completion of the project. Information about the questionnaires and consent form for participants were provided on the title page, and only practitioners who consented to participate in this research chose to answer the questionnaires. In addition, the Google online questionnaire system is secure because it does not identify any information about respondents (www.vdlab.com). The collected data cannot be linked to individual persons or traced by an e-mail or IP address.

Results

ECEC practitioners’ perceptions of the concept of children’s well-being

First, South Korean and Norwegian practitioners’ perceptions of the importance of the five domains of children’s well-being were analysed.

As shown in Table 2, practitioners’ perceptions of the five domains of children’s well-being as being important and very important ranged from 61.7% to 100%. Statistically significant differences between the two countries were found for the cognitive domain (χ² = 13.852, p < .01), the social domain (χ² = 9.648, p < .01), and the economic domain (χ² = 8.565, p < .05). That is, South Korean practitioners perceived the cognitive and economic domains as more important than Norwegian practitioners. Meanwhile, the practitioners from Norway perceived the social domain as more important than South Korean practitioners.

Table 2. Practitioners’ perception of five domains of children’s well-being (N = 192).

Variable	Country	Not important at all	Not important	Important	Very important	χ^2 (p)
Physical domain	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	20 (20.4%)	78 (79.6%)	2.639 (.267)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	2 (2.1%)	15 (16.0%)	77 (81.9%)
Psychological domain	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	1 (1.0%)	19 (19.4%)	78 (79.6%)	2.099 (.350)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	13 (13.8%)	81 (86.2%)
Cognitive domain	Korea (98)	1 (1.0%)	13 (13.2%)	42 (42.9%)	42 (42.9%)	13.852** (.003)
	Norway (94)	8 (8.5%)	26 (27.7%)	32 (34.0%)	28 (29.8%)
Social Domain	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	3 (3.1%)	21 (21.4%)	74 (75.5%)	9.648** (.008)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	8 (8.5%)	86 (91.5%)
Economic domain	Korea (98)	3 (3.1%)	16 (16.3%)	50 (51.0%)	29 (29.6%)	8.565* (.036)
	Norway (94)	7 (7.4%)	29 (30.9%)	38 (40.4%)	20 (21.3%)

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

Second, South Korean and Norwegian practitioners’ perceptions of the basic needs to be taken care of in fulfilling children’s well-being were analysed.

As shown in Table 3, the responses for basic needs to be taken care as well and very well ranged from 92.9% to 98.9%. Statistically significant differences between the two countries were found for physical needs (χ² = 17.294, p < .001); the need for affection, warmth, and tenderness (χ² = 9.538, p < .05); and the need for safety, clarity, and continuity (χ² = 6.138, p < .05). That is, Norwegian practitioners perceived physical needs and the need for affection, warmth, and tenderness as more important for fulfilling children’s well-being than South Korean practitioners. Conversely, South Korean practitioners perceived the need for safety, clarity, and continuity as more important for fulfilling children’s well-being than Norwegian practitioners.

Table 3. Practitioners’ perception of basic needs in fulfilling children’s well-being (N = 192).

Variable	Country	Not well at all	Not well	Well	Very well	χ^2 (p)
Physical needs	Korea (98)	1 (1.0%)	4 (4.1%)	42 (42.9%)	51 (52.0%)	17.294*** (.001)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	3 (3.2%)	16 (17.0%)	75 (79.8%)
The need for affection, warmth and tenderness	Korea (98)	1 (1.0%)	6 (6.1%)	42 (42.9%)	49 (50.0%)	9.538* (.023)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	1 (1.1%)	28 (29.8%)	65 (69.1%)
The need for safety, clarity and continuity	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	2 (2.0%)	51 (52.1%)	45 (45.9%)	6.138* (.046)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	6 (6.4%)	34 (36.2%)	54 (57.4%)
The need for recognition and affirmation	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	3 (3.0%)	48 (49.0%)	47 (48.0%)	4.255 (.119)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	2 (2.1%)	33 (35.1%)	59 (62.8%)
The need to experience oneself as capable	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	2 (2.0%)	51 (52.1%)	45 (45.9%)	2.223 (.329)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	3 (3.2%)	39 (41.5%)	52 (55.3%)
The need for meaning and moral values	Korea (98)	1 (1.0%)	3 (3.1%)	49 (50.0%)	45 (45.9%)	1.501 (.682)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	2 (2.1%)	52 (55.3%)	40 (42.6%)

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

Third, South Korean and Norwegian practitioners’ perceptions of different descriptors of children’s well-being were analysed.

As shown in Table 4, the responses for six descriptions of well-being that matched children’s expression of well-being high and very high ranged from 90.4% to 100%. A statistically significant difference between the two countries was found for enjoyment, having fun, and taking pleasure (χ² = 26.507, p < .001). That is, more Norwegian practitioners perceived enjoyment, having fun, and taking pleasure as describing children’s well-being well compared to South Korean practitioners.

Table 4. Practitioners’ perception of descriptors of children’s well-being (N = 192).

Variable	Country	Very low	Low	High	Very high	χ^2 (p)
Enjoyment, having fun, and taking pleasure	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	5 (5.1%)	48 (49.0%)	45 (45.9%)	26.507*** (.000)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	18 (19.1%)	76 (80.9%)
Relaxation and inner peace	Korea (98)	2 (2.0%)	11 (11.2%)	42 (42.9%)	43 (43.9%)	2.496 (.476)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	9 (9.6%)	38 (40.4%)	47 (50.0%)
Energy, vitality, and a lively expression	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	8 (8.2%)	44 (44.9%)	46 (46.9%)	.039 (.981)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	7 (7.4%)	43 (45.8%)	44 (46.8%)
Openness toward the world around them	Korea (98)	1 (1.0%)	8 (8.2%)	43 (43.9%)	46 (46.9%)	2.191 (.534)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	6 (6.4%)	36 (38.3%)	52 (55.3%)
Self-confidence, a sense of self-value, and pride	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	6 (6.1%)	36 (36.7%)	56 (57.2%)	.796 (.672)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	9 (9.6%)	33 (35.1%)	52 (55.3%)
Being in touch with oneself and one’s emotion	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	7 (7.1%)	39 (39.8%)	52 (53.1%)	1.495 (.473)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	6 (6.4%)	30 (31.9%)	58 (61.7%)

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

ECEC practitioners’ roles in supporting children’s well-being

First, South Korean and Norwegian practitioners’ roles as organisers of the environment to support children’s well-being were analysed.

As shown in Table 5, the percentage of practitioners who answered to perform or perform actively their roles as organisers of the environment ranged from 85.1% to 95.8%. Statistically significant differences between the two countries were found for fun and exciting environment (χ² = 6.300, p < .05), a safe environment for children’s health and well-being (χ² = 10.058, p < .01), and challenging and stimulating environments (χ² = 8.724, p < .05). That is, Norwegian practitioners more actively engaged in preparing and maintaining safe environments and fun and exciting environments than South Korean practitioners. However, more Korean practitioners moderately and actively provided challenging and stimulating environments than Norwegian practitioners, although the number of Norwegian practitioners who actively provided challenging and stimulating environments was higher than that of Korean practitioners.

Table 5. Practitioners’ roles as organisers of the environment (N = 192).

Variable	Country	Not perform at all	Not perform	Perform	Perform actively	χ^2 (p)
Enough spaces for all children to play	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	11 (11.2%)	39 (39.8%)	48 (49.0%)	6.111 (.106)
	Norway (94)	4 (4.3%)	8 (8.5%)	29 (30.8%)	53 (56.4%)
Safe environment for children’s health and well-being	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	10 (10.2%)	42 (42.9%)	46 (46.9%)	10.058**(.007)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	4 (4.3%)	25 (26.6%)	65 (69.1%)
Fun and exciting environment	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	7 (7.1%)	45 (46.0%)	46 (46.9%)	6.300* (.043)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	4 (4.3%)	29 (30.9%)	61 (64.9%)
Challenging and stimulating environment	Korea (98)	2 (2.0%)	6 (6.1%)	51 (52.0%)	39 (39.9%)	8.724* (.033)
	Norway (94)	2 (2.1%)	12 (12.8%)	30 (31.9%)	50 (53.2%)
Warm and comfortable environment	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	7 (7.1%)	44 (44.9%)	47 (48.0%)	.051 (.975)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	6 (6.4%)	42 (44.7%)	46 (48.9%)

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Second, South Korean and Norwegian practitioners’ roles as emotional supporters to facilitate children’s well-being were analysed.

As shown in Table 6, the percentage of practitioners who answered to perform or perform actively their roles as emotional supporters ranged from 94.6% to 100%. Statistically significant differences between the two countries were found for being aware of children’s feelings and developing empathy (χ² = 18.890, p < .001) and responding to children’s need for care (χ² = 24.014, p < .001). That is, Norwegian practitioners more actively were aware of children’s feelings and developed empathy and responded to children’s need for care compared to South Korean practitioners.

Table 6. Practitioners’ roles as emotional supporters (N = 192).

Variable	Country	Not perform at all	Not perform	Perform	Perform actively	χ^2 (p)
Providing opportunities to express feelings and manage emotions	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	4 (4.1%)	46 (46.9%)	48 (49.0%)	2.385 (.496)
	Norway (94)	1 (1.1%)	4 (4.3%)	36 (38.3%)	53 (56.3%)
Being aware of children’s feelings and developing empathy	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	4 (4.1%)	39 (39.8%)	55 (56.1%)	18.890*** (.000)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	15 (16.0%)	79 (84.0%)
Responding to children’s need for care	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	5 (5.1%)	46 (46.9%)	47 (48.0%)	24.014*** (.000)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	18 (19.1%)	76 (80.9%)

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Third, South Korean and Norwegian practitioners’ roles as supporters of play to promote children’s well-being were analysed.

As shown in Table 7, the percentage of practitioners who answered to perform or perform actively their roles as supporters of play ranged from 84.1% to 100%. Statistically significant differences between the two countries were found for observing and monitoring every child’s well-being (χ² = 27.425, p < .001), encouraging positive interactions (χ² = 15.192, p < .01), and encouraging child-initiated activities (χ² = 8.666, p < .05). That is, Norwegian practitioners more actively observed and monitored each child’s well-being based on his or her individual circumstances, development, and needs compared to South Korean practitioners. Norwegian practitioners also more actively encouraged positive (warm and intimate) child–child, child–environment, and practitioner–child interactions and child-initiated activities (rather than practitioner-directed structured activities) compared to South Korean practitioners.

Table 7. Practitioners’ roles as supporters of play (N = 192).

Variable	Country	Not perform at all	Not perform	Perform	Perform actively	χ^2 (p)
Observing and monitoring every child’s well-being	Korea (98)	2 (2.0%)	12 (12.2%)	54 (55.2%)	30 (30.6%)	27.425*** (.000)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	1 (1.1%)	32 (34.0%)	61 (64.9%)
Active physical activities for well-being and enjoyment	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	7 (7.1%)	47 (48.0%)	44 (44.9%)	2.711 (.438)
	Norway (94)	1 (1.1%)	8 (8.5%)	36 (38.3%)	49 (52.1%)
Encouraging positive interactions	Korea (98)	1 (1.0%)	7 (7.1%)	41 (41.8%)	49 (50.1%)	15.192** (.002)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	25 (26.6%)	69 (73.4%)
Encouraging child-initiated activities	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	11 (11.2%)	51 (52.0%)	36 (36.8%)	8.666* (.034)
	Norway (94)	1 (1.1%)	5 (5.3%)	36 (38.3%)	52 (55.3%)
Practicing freedom and autonomy	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	3 (3.1%)	44 (44.9%)	51 (52.0%)	.840 (.657)
	Norway (94)	0 (0.0%)	4 (4.3%)	47 (50.0%)	43 (45.7%)
A variety of toys and materials	Korea (98)	0 (0.0%)	7 (7.1%)	46 (47.0%)	45 (45.9%)	4.566 (.206)
	Norway (94)	2 (2.1%)	13 (13.8%)	40 (42.6%)	39 (41.5%)

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Discussion

We found that practitioners from both countries perceived the importance, basic needs, and descriptions of well-being properly and actively engaged in their roles as organisers of the environment, emotional supporters, and supporters of play. However, there were some differences in practitioners’ perceptions and performances across the two countries. Three issues with regard to these differences are discussed.

First, social/emotional aspects and a cognitive aspect of children’s well-being were regarded differently by ECEC practitioners from the two countries. South Korean practitioners perceived the cognitive and economic domains of well-being as more important, whereas Norwegian practitioners perceived the social domain as more important. Norwegian practitioners perceived physical needs and the need for affection, warmth, and tenderness as more important and enjoyment, fun, and pleasure as a more appropriate descriptor of children’s well-being compared to South Korean practitioners. Norwegian practitioners also stated that they provided fun and exciting environments, were aware of children’s feelings and developed empathy, and responded to children’s need for care more actively than South Korean practitioners. From these results, we can assume that basic needs, caring for children, and social and emotional aspects of well-being (e.g. affection, fun/excitement, and children’s feelings) are considered important in Norwegian ECEC whereas a cognitive aspect is important in South Korean ECEC.

These differences can be interpreted in light of the sociocultural contexts of the two countries. In Norway, there has long been an emphasis on well-being in the welfare state, and ECEC is fairly equal in welfare, such that cognitive and economic factors are not as significant or as noticeable as social and emotional qualities in the context of ECEC institutions (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training 2017). Rather, emotions and feelings, enjoyment and fun/pleasure, and children’s needs for care are more appreciated in Norwegian ECEC institutions. These perspectives of Norwegian practitioners support the assertion that feeling at ease, happiness, enjoyment, and psychological stability are crucial for children’s well-being (Laevers 2005; Layard and Dunn 2009), and positive emotions that children experience while playing are relevant to their well-being (Laevers 2005; Dodge et al. 2012). Children feel naturally happy, secure, confident, and curious when they are in a state of good health and their emotional needs are being met (Dutta et al. 2019). Thus, emotional aspects such as enjoyment, fun, and excitement might be important to children’s happy lives.

However, in South Korea, an atmosphere of academic achievement prevails because of parents’ enthusiasm over their children’s success in school and future job prospects and an overall competitive social climate (Tobin, Wu, and Davidson 1989; Nah 2017). This sociocultural context and rapid economic growth and development encourage an emphasis on cognitive and economic aspects of children’s lives. Some South Korean ECEC practitioners still pursue education rather than care and look after children’s cognitive needs rather than developing empathy for children’s feeling, although the national curriculum pursues children’s happiness as an important educational value (MEST and MOHW 2013; MOE and MOHW 2019a) and emphasises the need for care in ECEC institutions. According to international research on children’s well-being, social and emotional well-being are important to young children (Laevers 2000; Statham and Chase 2010; Dodge et al. 2012), and cognitive activities can contribute to lower well-being in young children (Sandseter and Seland 2016; Sando 2019b). However, the cognitive and economic domains might be important to children as well, in particular school-age children, because they contribute to children’s academic achievement and ultimately their confidence (Noble et al. 2008; Kimbel and Schellenberg 2013). Therefore, all aspects of well-being must be appreciated (Pollard and Lee 2003), and resources to meet children’s particular needs have to be provided (Dodge et al. 2012).

Second, there were differences in practitioners’ roles in supporting children’s well-being in terms of play and autonomy. Norwegian practitioners more actively observed and monitored every child’s well-being, encouraged positive interactions, and encouraged child-initiated activities (rather than practitioner-led structured activities) compared to South Korean practitioners. These results mean that ECEC in Norway adopts an individualised approach and encourages child autonomy. According to existing research, children really enjoy play and experience well-being when they are autonomous and take the initiative in their play (Laevers 2000, 2005); when they have the opportunity to influence where they move, what they do, and with whom they interact (Sandseter and Seland 2016); and when practitioners minimise their intervention (McLane, Spielberger, and Klugman 1996; Yang 2002; Yang and Nah 2005). Bjørgen (2015) also emphasised practitioners’ role in facilitating play situations that create challenges, variety, autonomy, and social relationships in promoting children’s high level of well-being.

ECEC in both Norway and South Korea pursues a child-centred, play-based approach to education. However, ECEC in Norway mostly uses free play and individual or small-group activities that fit an individualised approach to education. By contrast, in South Korea structured practitioner-led activities, tightly scheduled daily routines, and large-group activities still take place in some ECEC institutions (Nah 2017; Waller and Nah 2017) such that practitioners have difficulty observing and monitoring each individual child, encouraging warm and positive interactions, and allowing/promoting child-initiated activities. As part of an effort to promote child-centred, play-based education in South Korea, many city or province offices of education have been running model child-centred, play-based institutions since 2013. The Revised Nuri Curriculum adopted in 2020 emphasises the child-centred, play-based approach, and practitioners are empowered to implement the national curriculum on their own rather than imposing structured, uniform activities prepared by the government (MOE and MOHW 2019a, 2019b). This recent change in South Korea may eventually facilitate children’s well-being by supporting practitioners in pursuing play-based education, which allows child autonomy and child-initiated activities. In this context, practitioners may also focus on observing and monitoring what play children are interested in and what activities they participate in, and encouraging positive interactions among children and between children and practitioners. As a whole, South Korean practitioners are moving toward child-centred, play-based education that contributes to children’s well-being by taking on roles as appropriate supporters of play.

Third, the issue of safety stood out in this study. South Korean practitioners perceived the need for safety, clarity, and continuity as more important to children’s well-being than their Norwegian counterparts. Norwegian practitioners thought that they more actively provided safe environments for children’s health and well-being compared to their South Korean counterparts. These results mean that South Korean practitioners are sensitive to the issue of safety such that they are not satisfied with their environment in terms of safety; they think that they do not provide a safe enough environment for children’s well-being. In addition, South Korean practitioners thought that they generally provided challenging and stimulating environments to enhance children’s well-being. However, Norwegian practitioners seem to be more permissive to the challenging activities that could raise safety issues when we refer to their higher frequency of responses on ‘providing challenging and stimulating environments actively’ compared to South Korean practitioners. This result means that South Korean practitioners provide stimulating and challenging environments at a moderate level to facilitate children’s learning and development, but they are not active in providing challenging activities because of safety issues.

Challenging activities are prevalent in Norway, where outdoor activity is a part of daily life and children commonly engage in fun and exciting activities in nature (Sandseter 2014). Within this sociocultural context, ECEC practitioners in Norway regard fun, exciting, and challenging environments as important and allow children to enjoy challenging and risky play. Recently, South Korean ECEC adopted an ecological approach, forest activities approach, or innovated play-based approach that tends to provide environments for children to enjoy challenging and thrilling play. However, most practitioners working for typical ECEC institutions in South Korea regard safety as a priority because a large portion of ECEC in South Korea depends on the private sector (Nah and Waller 2015). Thus, there is no other choice for practitioners in this social context but to provide safe environments with risk-free resources and materials rather than challenging environments for thrilling and risky play. It is difficult yet important for practitioners to balance challenge and safety, because challenging activities expand children’s boundaries and confidence while safety is directly related to the lives of children (Kwon and Oh 2019).

In conclusion, the ECEC practitioners from Norway and South Korea in this study perceived the importance of well-being and played their roles to support and facilitate children’s well-being appropriately, although there were some differences between the countries. Practitioners in each country need to determine appropriate ways to support and facilitate children’s well-being in their different sociocultural contexts. The aim is to encourage child-initiated activities and create an environment that is fun, exciting, stimulating, and challenging, yet safe, where children feel at ease, secure, and joyful. An effective approach is to use natural spaces to facilitate children’s well-being, because people generally feel comfortable, find enjoyment, and experience a reduction in negative emotions in nature, ultimately experiencing well-being (Bilton 2010; Chawla 2015; Sando 2019a). Elements in nature also generate challenges and variety and allow children autonomy, positive interactions, and social relationships, all of which contribute to the well-being of both practitioners and children (Bjørgen and Svendsen 2015). A happy early childhood should be the first priority of ECEC across all countries.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Soonchunhyang University Research Fund.